beta
Text
1. The defendant shall pay 700,000,000 won to the plaintiff and 30% per annum from January 1, 2009 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
1. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as to the cause of the claim, it is recognized that the Plaintiff leased KRW 700,000 to the Defendant on July 15, 2008 by setting the interest rate of KRW 2.5% on July 15, 2008, due date of payment October 14, 2008, and that the Plaintiff had completed the registration of establishment of each of the real estate in the name C, D, and E as the mortgagee and the Defendant for each of the real estate in the name of the said loan claim.
Meanwhile, the Plaintiff received interest on the above loan amounting to KRW 45,00,000 each month from August 1, 2008 to October 2008, the sum of KRW 15,000,000,000 as interest on the above loan, and KRW 13,174,579 on November 27, 2009; KRW 40,538,91 on October 1, 2010 and appropriated for the repayment of interest on the above loan and delay damages (i.e., interest on the above loan from July 15, 2008 to December 31, 2008; KRW 97,808, KRW 174,579 on November 27, 2009; KRW 40,538,90 on May 30, 205 x 9050 on July 15, 2008).
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 700,000,000 and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 30% per annum from January 1, 2009 to the date of full payment, as the Plaintiff seeks.
2. The defendant's assertion argues that the defendant's above KRW 700,000 from the plaintiff is not the defendant, but the person who borrowed the above KRW 700,000 from the plaintiff is F, and the defendant did not refuse the F's request while working as an employee in F's real estate office, and the above KRW 700,000 in the name of the defendant merely prepared a loan certificate (Evidence A 1).
On the other hand, it is difficult to believe that the statement of No. 2 as shown in the above argument by the defendant is consistent with the above argument by the defendant, and the statement of No. 1 alone is insufficient to recognize the above argument by the defendant, and it is different to recognize it.